Settlement, But Not a Class Victory
Despite amassing $71 million in combined settlements—including $46 million in 2023 from multiple defendants and an earlier $25 million deal with Credit Suisse in 2022—the plaintiffs failed to clear a crucial hurdle: class certification.
In December 2023, Judge Oetken ruled that the investors had not demonstrated the ability to prove their antitrust claims with common evidence, a key requirement for proceeding as a class.
“Plaintiffs have failed to persuasively rebut defendants’ strong showing that there were numerous at- or below-zero trades during the class period,” Judge Oetken wrote.
The banks argued that many trades were executed at spreads of zero or below, making them immune to any price manipulation. Such trades, they contended, would not be possible in anonymous trading environments, weakening the core of the plaintiffs’ conspiracy theory.
Why the $35.5M Fee Still Matters
In their April motion for attorneys’ fees, Cohen Milstein and Quinn Emanuel insisted that the $35.5 million reward represented just a fraction of the resources poured into the prolonged legal battle.
“While the court eventually found the case could not proceed as a class action, that does not mean the need to incentivize the enforcement of our nation’s laws went away,” the motion asserted.
Judge Oetken appeared to agree, recognizing the sheer scale and risk involved in the litigation, especially given that the class route ultimately failed. The fee award stands as a testament to the value of private enforcement in antitrust cases, even without class status.
